From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ron@ronnatalie.com (Ron Natalie) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2017 14:23:49 -0400 Subject: UNIX version 2*pi In-Reply-To: References: <201710161158.v9GBweD4005539@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> <201710161639.v9GGdtTg014500@darkstar.fourwinds.com> <20171016191640.mqqbf7cp6yfyb6se@matica.foolinux.mooo.com> <201710161928.v9GJSB8Y028111@darkstar.fourwinds.com> <20171017011554.76ffxpcotcxlxeeo@matica.foolinux.mooo.com> <81DB1DA1-D194-4A5B-9253-D8EE6E85CC26@gmail.com> Message-ID: <07b401d34775$14e230b0$3ea69210$@ronnatalie.com> One of my predecessors at JHU decided 6.06 was a nice symmetrical number and stuck the version there through many kernel changes. When he left, our release numbers started forward again. The BRL/JHU kernel was based on V6. It had a kludge to allow more that 256 users but eventually, we widened the UID/GID to 16 bits each. We then added a the ability to mount either V6 or V7 file systems (we had a lot of removable V6 FS media). -----Original Message----- From: TUHS [mailto:tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org] On Behalf Of Dave Horsfall Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 2:09 AM To: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society Subject: Re: UNIX version 2*pi On Tue, 17 Oct 2017, Don Hopkins wrote: > McGill University EE UNIX lab systems administration, PDP-11 running > UNIX version 2*pi (>6, <7, irrational) Sounds like the one I was maintaining at UNSW: Edition 6, with the bits of Edition 7 that would fit on an 11/40 and 11/60, plus local AUSAM stuff. -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer."